1
Trump Insists Clearly Edited Pic of Abrego Garcia's Tats is Real in Testy Interview
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29815 readers
3133 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
okay then, let’s stop short and say they’re neo nazi dog whistles then
that is both possible, and doesn’t invalidate that it’s also a nazi dog whistle
that’s what ya get for using dog whistles constantly
There is nothing wrong with categorizing symbols that are used for white supremacy and ethnic cleansing crusades as being "Nazi".
You don't need to be a German soldier in the 1930s to be a Nazi. These types of "technically" corrections are not helpful and just play into doubt for people that don't understand history. Like yourself apparently.
Modern day Nazis aren't tattooing swastikas. They're running our businesses and our country.
You are the one not understanding the history. You are adding doubt to symbols of white supremacy. You are pointing to the Christian equivalent of an ISIS flag and telling us it's not "neo Nazi".
You are dealing with fascist and saying exactly what fascist would say to deny their symbols of white supremacy.
It's like pointing out that the swastika is a Hindu symbol when you see one tattooed on a fucking skin head Nazi punk. What point are you trying to make in that context?
Do you get how it's fucking useless to do this? And only plays into the fascist narrative of doubt? You're being helpful only to fascist.
if facts mattered we wouldnt be in this whole situation to begin with.
Guy just comes over from reddit, uses reddit in his username, and proceeds to explain how the obviously nazi tattoos on the US Secretary of Defence are maybe not obviously nazi tattoos ....
If you read you've probably heard about a little something called "Occam's razor".
What's the most probable answer, that a far right news host from a far right news channel is sporting his tattoos as a symbol of his love of history and the holy land, or that he's sporting them because he's a fucking nazi.
Nobody is denying your "history" of the symbol. We're all well aware of the "larger story". But it's irrelevant because there's an approximate 99.99999% probability that the guy who doesn't understand the wider history of the cross is the guy that's fucking wearing them.
You can write a thousand paragraphs "teaching people" all you want, but it's totally irrelevant in this situation and you are only doing it in order to obfuscate the issue with meaningless nonsense.
And a swastika represents "good fortune" and "well-being" in Hindu and other Indian cultures, concepts I would support, but I still wouldn't get it tattooed on my body because of it's other meanings.
If this guy is ignorant of the more recent meanings, that is just as troubling as if he knew their modern interpretations. If someone had elaborate Nazi imagery all over their body, and they were truly ignorant of the meanings, I would not think that they possessed the intelligence and judgement to supervise any people or projects.
Whether he knew about it or not, it's a problem, and this guy is in charge of the Pentagon.
You don't know what army patches and slogans are, but you think it's a lie lol wow
He has the preamble to the declaration of independence on his other arm lmao. I agree the guy's most likely a neo Nazi but boy are your arguments dumb.
I didn't say it made him a history buff. I said your argument was dumb. You show up with that argument against anyone who doesn't already agree with you and you're going to get reamed.
I'm not defending him. I'm criticizing you.
To me, this is equally as bad as Nazi symbology
They're not necessarily all "Neo-Nazi," but they're definitely Neo-Nazi adjacent.